FOftfc,          < 

~~^~  ^ 


^ 

J 


a: 


vvVOSA^CflfT/          ^ 

liff|  § 


g 


I 


I  f 

3     i 


. 
Q     3 


iV^T^f  1 

^OJI1V3-JO^      %OJI1V3JO^ 

^KAUFO%    g*™^ 

.  v,_,§ 

! 


l|^l  i 

v/Sa3A)Na3V\V 

^clOSANC[l5x> 

^        ^ 


k^^  ^    % 

"^ja3AiNn-3\\v 


A«  INIVfBS/^        ,.vlOSANC[[fJ> 


4J 


zn  %±±: 


irvW 


051151 


Not  to  Undeceive  is  to  Deceive  " 


How  the  Bible  Was 
Invented 


A  Lecture  Delivered 
Before  the  Indepen- 
dent Religious  Society 
Orchestra  Hall 
Chicago.  Illinois 
Sunday  at  11  A.  M. 


Tenth  Edition 


By 
M.  M.  MANGASARIAN 


tije  IBible  OTas:  3lnbenteb 


Many  good  people  believe  that  the  Bible  was  given  by 
inspiration  of  God.  The  wording  of  my  subject  suggests 
that  it  is  the  work  of  men,  and  not  always  of  honest  men, 
either.  Am  I  trying  to  offend  people  by  intimating  that  the 
Bible  was  invented?  On  the  contrary,  I  am  exposing  myself 
to  criticism  by  telling  these  good  people  the  truth  about  the 
Bible,  which  their  own  preachers,  for  some  reason  or  other, 
have  withheld  from  them. 

One  of  the  texts  in  the  Bible,  attributed  to  Jesus,  says  that, 
It  were  better  for  a  man  to  have  a  millstone  tied  about  his 
neck,  and  he  were  cast  into  the  sea,  than  that  he  should  offend, 
that  is  to  say,  unsettle  the  faith  of,  "one  of  these  little  ones." 
According  to  this  saying  of  Jesus,  a  man  must  keep  his  ques- 
tionings and  his  doubts  to  himself.  He  shall  not  talk  where 
he  is  liable  to  upset  the  faith  of  some  believing  soul, — some 
aged  mother,  some  Sunday-school  lad  or  lassie.  The  man  who 
will  go  about  disturbing  people's  religious  peace,  deserves  to 
be  drowned  with  a  millstone  about  his  neck !  What  is  your 
opinion  of  such  a  suggestion? 

If  you  approve  of  this  sentiment,  attributed  to  the  founder 
of  Christianity,  then  the  work  which  we  are  doing  here,  every 
Sunday,  is  quite  wicked ;  a  millstone  around  our  necks  is  what 
we  deserve,  and  the  bottom  of  the  sea  is  where  we  belong. 

Psychologists  tell  us  that  there  is  great  power  in  sug- 
gestion. With  all  my  love  and  reverence  for  whatever  is  sweet 
and  sane  in  the  Gospels,  I  must  protest  against  this  text,  be- 
cause it  is  a  suggestion  to  violence  and  persecution.  If  Jesus 
suggests  a  millstone  for  the  neck  of  the  heretic  who  upsets 
people's  illusions  and  makes  inquirers  out  of  believers,  and 
intimates  further  that  drowning  is  too  good  for  them,  why 
not  take  the  hint  and  act  upon  it?  He  expresses  a  wish,  shall 


Stack 
Annex 


we  not  fulfill  it?  Alas,  we  know,  too  well,  that  in  less  en- 
lightened  ages,  the  suggestion  of  Jesus  was  not  only  carried 
out,  but  vastly  improved  upon  —  by  the  Spanish  Inquisition, 
for  instance. 

Let  us  be  fair.  When  a  man  is  accused,  it  is  his  privilege 
to  defend  himself.  If  Jesus  suggests  that  the  investigator  who 
unsettles  people's  beliefs  should  be  drowned,  before  the  sug- 
gestion is  acted  upon,  the  disturber  should  be  given  a  chance 
to  be  heard.  Would  that  be  asking  too  much?  Let  us  see, 
then,  just  what  it  means  to  command  a  man  to  suppress  what- 
ever might  disturb  a  neighbor's  faith  :  It  means  that  if  I  am 
announced  to  speak  on  the  Bible,  I  must  say  nothing  to  which 
the  weakest  or  the  most  credulous  among  my  hearers  might 
object.  If  I  do,  I  shall  deserve  to  be  tied  to  a  millstone  and 
drowned  !  But  let  us  turn  this  proposition  about  to  see  how 
it  would  work  :  Having  discovered  a  truth,  and  yearning 
in  my  soul  to  express  it,  suppose  I  were  to  say,  that  if  any 
man  in  this  audience  shall  scare  me  into  silence,  —  shall  cheat 
me  out  of  the  joy  and  duty  of  imparting  that  truth  to  my 
world,  by  threatening  to  be  offended,  or  to  be  unsettled  by  it, 
—  he  ought  to  have  a  millstone  tied  to  his  neck  and  be  cast  into 
the  sea.  How  would  that  do? 

Again,  an  illustration,  which  I  have  used  before,  can  with 
great  aptness  be  repeated  here  :  A  woman  is  given  a  ring 
with  a  stone  in  it.  Not  being  herself  a  connoisseur  of  precious 
stones,  she  is  easily  made  to  believe  that  her  jewel  is  the 
most  costly  in  the  world.  This  is  told  her  in  order  to  make 
her  happy,  and  to  fancy  herself  as  the  possessor  of  a  gem  of 
great  value.  Observe,  now,  how  much  it  costs  to  keep  up 
this  deception.  All  her  friends  have  to  agree  to  say  nothing 
that  may  unsettle  her  faith  in  her  imitation  jewel.  Indeed, 
they  must  pretend  not  to  know  the  difference  between  the 
genuine  and  the  sham  stone.  To  preserve  this  woman's  illu- 
sion, they  must  prevaricate  and  even  openly  lie,  if  pressed 
to  do  so,  lest  the  poor  woman's  eyes  should  open,  or  her  faith 
in  her  jewel  be  lost.  Is  it  fair  to  demand  so  great  a  sacrifice 
to  prolong  the  fantasy  of  a  foolish  woman? 

Apply  this  illustration  now  to  the  Bible.  Here  are  some 
people  who  have  been  told  when  they  were  young,  that  this 
book,  which  is  placed  in  their  hands,  is  a  personal  message 

3 


±051154 


to  them  from  God.  This  makes  the  book,  certainly,  more  pre- 
cious than  any  jewel.  God,  the  owner  and  disposer  of  every- 
thing, with  his  own  hand  has  inscribed  an  epistle  to  them,  and 
this  is  it!  What  joy!  What  a  treasure!  Now  these  people, 
not  being  students  themselves,  accepted  implicitly  what  they 
were  told  by  their  teachers,  just  as  the  woman,  not  being 
an  expert  herself,  took  her  jeweler's  word  about  the  value  of 
the  stone  in  her  ring.  In  order  not  to  offend  this  child-like 
faith  in  the  Bible,  word  is  sent  out  to  everybody  to  hush. 
Hush !  not  a  word !  not  a  whisper ! — Hush !  hush !  is  the  cry 
of  all.  To  uphold  this  conspiracy  of  silence,  arrangements 
are  made  to  dictate  what  may  and  what  may  not  be  said  in 
public.  A  preacher  in  praying  or  preaching  might  give  away 
the  secret, — he  might  inadvertently  say  something  which  may 
prick  this  pretty  bubble  of  illusion.  Hence,  in  the  Catholic 
and  Episcopal  Churches,  all  the  prayers  are  printed,  and  the 
preachers  pray  according  to  the  book.  Do  you  think  the 
Church  will  let  a  man  close  his  eyes  and  open  his  mouth  and 
say  whatever  comes  into  his  head?  Indeed,  not!  He  must 
pray  by  the  book.  In  the  protestant  denominations  there  is 
the  creed,  to  which  you  swear  your  allegiance  before  you  can 
open  your  mouth  in  one  of  their  churches,  and  the  moment  you 
are  caught  talking  beyond  what  the  creed  allows,  your  ordina- 
tion is  taken  from  you  and  your  mouth  is  shut.  Dear  me !  all 
this  regime  is  for  the  purpose  of  encouraging  the  conceit  that 
man  has  been  favored  with  a  hand-written,  personal  message, 
from  the  Creator  of  the  universe. 

If  this  were  all,  we,  ourselves,  would  not  take  notice  of  it. 
But  we,  too,  are  compelled  to  join  this  conspiracy  of  silence 
and  suppression,  and  to  lie  in  the  interests  of  the  delicate 
believers  whose  faith  cannot  stand  the  least  strain.  Darwin 
must  beware  how  he  writes  about  the  origin  of  species,  or  the 
descent  of  man.  Some  believer,  hugging  ecstatically  his  Bible 
to  his  bosom,  might  read  his  books  and  lose  his  blissful  con- 
ceit. Do  not  think,  do  not  invent,  do  not  announce  your  truth, 
ye  philosophers,  scientists  and  reformers !  without  first  con- 
sulting the  prejudices  of  the  "little  ones"  in  the  faith ;  for  if 
you  unsettle  the  faith  of  a  single  believer,  it  were  better  that 
you  were  weighted  down  into  the  sea  by  a  millstone  hanging 
about  your  necks.  And  you,  whose  love  and  genius  give  us 


our  daily  victory  over  disease  and  error, — whose  thought  is 
our  daily  bread  and  beauty, — you,  too,  must  hush,  you  must 
become  sterile,  or  be  content  to  speak  by  rote,  lest  you  should 
disturb  the  repose  of  the  believer  who  has  laid  himself  down 
to  sleep.  The  theological  babe  must  not  be  awakened.  It  will 
bawl  and  cry  if  aroused,  and  better  than  cause  one  of  these 
babes  to  cry,  let  there  be  no  intellectual  life  in  the  world ! 

Our  American  author,  Thoreau,  was  right  when  he  said 
that,  "The  modern  Christian  is  a  man  who  has  consented  to 
say  all  the  prayers  in  the  liturgy,  provided  you  will  let  him  go 
straight  to  bed  and  sleep  quietly  afterward."  That  is  to  say, 
he  does  not  wish  to  be  disturbed.  "All  his  prayers  begin  with," 
says  Thoreau,  "Now  I  lay  me  down  to  sleep."  Sleep,  seems 
to  be  his  quest,  intellectual  as  well  as  physical,  "and  he  is 
forever  looking  forward  to  the  time  when  he  shall  go  to  his 
'long  rest.'  "  He  looks  forward  to  a  future  of  inactivity.  All 
effort,  especially  intellectual  effort,  is  distasteful  to  him,  and 
is  apt  to  offend  and  unsettle  him.  Hence  the  intellectual  life 
must  not  be  real ;  what  must  be  real  is  the  sleep. 

Those  of  you  who  support  these  lectures,  as  well  as  those 
of  you  who  only  hear  them,  know  that  our  position  is  the 
very  reverse  of  what  Jesus  and  the  Church  recommend.  We 
do  not  believe  in  persecution.  We  do  not  even  suggest  that 
anybody  should  be  drowned ;  but  if  our  human  nature  is  so 
depraved  that  persecution  and  murder  are  inevitable,  then, 
in  our  humble  opinion,  it  will  be  more  economical  to  drown 
the  people  who  will  not  permit  a  Darwin  to  give  his  thought 
to  the  world,  than  to  drown  a  Darwin.  The  man  who  is 
offended  at  freedom  of  speech,  can  be  dispensed  with  more 
safely  than  the  man  who  avails  himself  of  this  divine  privi- 
lege. If  my  freedom  of  speech  offends  my  neighbor,  his  fear 
of  freedom  is  a  greater  offense  to  me.  Which  of  us  deserves 
most  to  be  drowned? 

But  in  the  next  place  the  suggestion  that  people  who  rob 
their  weaker  fellows  of  their  illusions  should  be  drowned, 
even  when  it  does  not  lead  to  persecution,  is  an  encouragement 
to  hypocrisy  and  imposture,  as  the  story  of  the  composition  of 
the  Bible  which  will  now  be  told,  shows. 

You  have  to  listen  as  closely  as  you  can,  if  you  do  not 
wish  to  do  me  the  injustice  of  misrepresenting  me.  I  have 


traveled  extensively  in  the  Orient,  and  have  conversed  with 
and  read  the  works  of  eminent  scholars  who  have  enjoyed  a 
first-hand  acquaintance  with  eastern  people,  and  the  unanimous, 
testimony  is  that  one  of  the  besetting  sins  of  Oriental  races, 
is  lying.  It  is  not  because  the  Asiatics  are  wickeder  than 
European  nations,  for  in  other  respects  they  are  as  good,  if 
not  better,  than  ourselves.  The  average  of  morality  is  perhaps 
about  the  same  in  all  countries.  But  the  notorious  vice  of  all 
Asiatic  peoples  is  lying.  They  lie  with  a  freedom  and  a 
fluency, — with  such  plausibility  and  so  straight  a  face, — that 
one  can  hardly  distinguish  their  lie  from  their  truth.  Curious 
though  it  may  seem,  people  who  are  given  to  lying  are  often 
the  first  to  be  deceived  by  their  own  lies.  They 

"Keep  on  till  their  own  lies  deceive  them, 
And  oft'  repeating,  at  length  believed  'em." 

Now,  then,  I  am  going  to  look  this  audience  in  the  face, 
and  then  I  am  going  to  say  just  this: 

The  Bible  is  an  Oriental  book. 

When,  in  reading  the  Bible,  I  find  in  it  exaggeration,  in- 
vention, and  even  unscrupulous  misrepresentation,  I  am  not 
astonished,  because  I  know  that  it  is  an  Oriental  book.  But 
the  orthodox  believer,  in  order  to  excuse  or  explain  away, 
for  instance,  these  violations  of  the  law  of  veracity,  resorts 
frequently  to  sophistry,  subterfuge,  and  even,  alas,  to  lies 
more  unscrupulous  than  any  found  in  the  Bible.  This  is  as 
sad  as  it  is  true.  But  to  defend  one  lie,  or  to  make  it  look 
like  the  truth,  more  lying  becomes  necessary. 

There  are  numerous  instances  of  the  Oriental  practice  of 
lying  in  the  Bible.  Abraham  suppressed  the  truth  about  his 
wife,  and  declared  she  was  his  sister.  Jacob  deceived  his 
father,  Isaac,  and  made  him  believe  he  was  Esau,  and  stole 
his  blessing.  The  same  patriarch  deceived  his  father-in-law, 
and  stole  his  gods.  God  himself  instructs  Samuel  to  tell  a 
falsehood  to  Saul,  to  whom  he  is  sent  on  a  mission.  "I  will 
send  them  a  lying  spirit,"  threatens  Jehovah,  when  he  is  out 
of  temper.  And,  in  the  New  Testament,  the  Apostle  Paul  is 
Oriental  enough,  though  in  many  respects  a  great  soul,  to 
resort  to  "craft  and  guile,"  and  to  be  "all  things  to  all  men," 
and  even  to  lie  for  the  glory  of  God.  Aside  from  this  being 
6 


his  own  policy,  he  imagined  that  it  was  also  the  policy  of  God. 
"And  for  this  cause,"  he  says  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  "God  shall  send  them  strong  delusion,  that  they  should 
believe  in  a  lie."  Reflect  upon  that.  To  send  a  delusion  to 
people  means  to  trip  or  trap  them, — to  catch  them  in  a  snare. 
People  tell  a  falsehood,  either  to  protect  themselves,  or  to 
hurt  others.  God  needed  not  to  resort  to  this  means  to  pro- 
tect himself.  Paul  tells  us  he  does  this  to  hurt  others.  "God 
shall  send  them  strong  delusion,  that  they  might  believe  a  lie 
that  they  all  might  be  damned."  How  could  Paul,  an  excep- 
tionally intelligent  man,  be  guilty  of  such  blasphemy?  How 
could  he  so  damage  the  character  of  the  God  he  loved?  My 
answer  is  that  he  was  an  Asiatic,  and  he  did  not  look  upon 
lying  in  the  same  light  that  Europeans  do.  The  Asiatic  con- 
science for  veracity  has  never  enjoyed  a  very  high  reputation. 
The  Apostle  Paul  even  boasts  that,  "being  crafty,  I  caught 
you  with  guile." 

A  very  curious  controversy  took  place  some  years  ago,  be- 
tween Herbert  Spencer  and  a  religious  Weekly.  Quoting  the 
words  of  Paul  to  the  Romans,  where  he  says,  "For  if  the  truth 
of  God  hath  more  abounded  through  my  lie  unto  his  glory, 
etc.,"  Spencer  condemned  Paul  for  this;  the  religious  Weekly 
objected  that  Paul  was  only  speaking  ironically.  And  Mr. 
Spencer  generously  admitted  that  such  a  supposition  was  quite 
possible.  We  are  ourselves  willing  to  give  Paul  every  oppor- 
tunity to  exonerate  himself,  and  will  not  press  the  charge  too 
vehemently  against  him.  But  whatever  Paul  may  have  meant 
in  his  argument  with  the  Romans,  what  shall  we  say  about  his 
defense  of  "guile  and  craft,"  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians?  And  what  about  his  general  policy,  to  be  all  things 
to  all  men, — that  is  to  say,  to  trim  and  compromise? 

Moreover,  the  practice  of  the  Church  during  the  early  cen- 
turies, confirms  the  criticism  of  such  representative  writers  as 
Mosheim,  Ellicott,  Warburton,  Lecky,  Gibbon,  Jortin,  Gieseler, 
and  other  equally  reliable  authorities,  that  "The  pernicious 
maxim  that  those  who  make  it  their  business  to  deceive  with 
a  view  of  promoting  the  cause  of  truth,  were  deserving  rather 
of  commendation  than  of  censure." 

"History  forces  upon  us,"  writes  Bishop  Ellicott,  "the 
recognition  of  pious  fraud  as  a  principle  which  was  by  no 


means  inoperative  in  the  earliest  ages  of  Christianity."  It 
reflects  credit  upon  this  Bishop, — this  European, — to  admit 
that  the  early  Christians  cultivated  the  Oriental  practice  of 
"lying  for  the  glory  of  God."  Eusebius,  the  saint  who  in- 
vented Constantine's  vision  of  the  cross,  boasted  that  "he  had 
written  what  redounded  to  the  glory  and  suppressed  whatever 
tended  to  the  disgrace  of  religion." 

"No  faith  with  the  heretics,"  was  the  cry  of  the  Christian 
church  for  centuries. 

My  object  in  speaking  of  this  is  to  show  that  even  as  our 
Oriental-born  religion,  brought  over  into  Europe  the  germ  of 
monasticism,  religious  intolerance,  the  practise  of  burning  men 
and  women  alive, — absolutism  in  matters  of  faith,  determining 
by  authority  of  councils  what  shall  and  what  shall  not  be  the 
truth, — not  one  of  which  institutions  previously  existed  in 
Europe;  it  also  brought  over,  the  Oriental  practice  of  pious 
lying,  and  gave  it  a  vogue  which  it  had  never  before  enjoyed 
in  Europe. 

It  is  universally  admitted  that  beside  the  four  Gospels  which 
the  churches  believe  to  be  genuine,  there  were,  in  the  early 
centuries,  hundreds  of  Gospels  which  have  been  rejected  as 
spurious.  Pause  for  a  moment,  and  think  of  what  that  means. 
Why  were  there  so  many  lying  Gospels?  The  very  fact  that 
our  four  Gospels  were  chosen  from  a  pile  of  manuscripts, 
everyone  of  which  claimed  to  be  genuine,  is  a  sad  commen- 
tary upon  the  morality  of  the  early  churchmen.  I  trust  you 
duly  appreciate  the  significance  of  this.  What  was  it  that  gave 
an  impetus  to  the  industry  of  imposture?  How  explain  the 
vogue  which  lying  for  religion  enjoyed  after  the  conversion 
of  the  Roman  Empire?  Was  it  so  profitable  to  manufacture 
Gospels  that  everybody  tried  his  hand  at  it?  I  cannot  get 
away  from  the  tremendous  fact  that  by  the  admission  of  the 
churches  themselves,  there  were  a  great  number  of  apocryphal 
Gospels  thrown  upon  the  religious  market  as  soon  as  Christian- 
ity became  well  established  in  Europe.  What  made  lying  so 
popular  and  profitable  all  at  once?  If  it  is  true,  and  it  is, 
that  our  four  Gospels  had  to  be  voted  upon  from  among  a 
heap  of  other  manuscripts ;  and  if  it  is  true,  as  one  Church 
father  reports,  that  a  great  number  of  manuscripts  were  placed 
under  a  table,  and  that  prayers  were  then  offered  to  induce 


the  genuine  Gospels  to  jump  upon  the  table,  and  that  four  of 
them  did  so,  while  the  rest,  failing  to  jump  upon  the  table, 
were  disowned ;  and  if  it  is  also  true,  and  we  know  it  is,  that 
some  of  the  Christian  fathers  claimed  that  only  four  Gospels 
could  be  genuine  because  the  earth  has  four  corners,  and  four 
winds.  If  all  this  is  true — then,  speaking  as  a  student  of  his- 
tory, whether  it  unsettles  you  or  not,  I  am  constrained  to  say 
that  this  Oriental  religion,  as  soon  as  it  set  foot  in  Europe, 
lifted  both  superstition  and  lying  to  the  dignity  of  a  vocation. 

But  when  we  come  to  the  four  Gospels  themselves,  pro- 
nounced to  be  canonical,  do  you  know,  my  hearers,  that  there 
are  upwards  of  150,000  different  readings  of  these  same  Gos- 
pels? That  is  to  say,  the  same  passages  read  one  way  in  one 
manuscript,  and  another,  in  another,  while  they  may  be  absent 
altogether  from  a  third,  etc.  In  view  of  all  these  facts,  reflect 
upon  the  intelligence  of  the  man  who,  Sunday  after  Sunday, 
holds  up  the  Gospels  as  the  infallible  word  of  God.  He  does 
so  because  he  is  speaking  by  the  creed,  to  which  he  has  sworn 
allegiance  for  the  rest  of  his  life.  One  hundred  and  fifty  thou- 
sand various  readings  of  the  New  Testament!  And  think  of 
the  centuries  of  bloodshed  and  controversy  over  these  various 
readings ! 

Open,  if  you  please,  your  New  Testaments  and  read  the 
seventh  verse  of  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  first  epistle  of  John, 
then  look  for  the  same  verse  in  the  Revised  Version,  and  you 
will  not  find  it  there.  After  being  regarded  as  the  word  of 
God  for  two  thousand  years,  it  has  been  expurgated.  Today, 
according  to  one  Bible  (the  King  James  Version),  this  passage 
is  inspired;  according  to  another  Bible  (the  Revised  Version), 
it  is  an  imposture.  Let  me  quote  the  text: 

"For  there  are  three  that  bear  record  in  Heaven,  the 
Father,  the  Word,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  these  three 
are  one." 

What  better  proof  of  the  Trinity  do  we  need?  On  black 
and  white,  in  the  Bible,  John,  the  Apostle,  declares  by  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  there  are  three  in  heaven,  gives 
their  names,  and  adds  that  these  three  are  one. 

Some  lying  scribe,  some  crabbed  sectarian,  some  uncon- 
scionable copyist,  bribed  by  his  party,  must  have  invented  this 

9 


text,  which,  for  twenty  centuries,  has  been  worshiped  as  the 
word  of  God.  Wicked  sceptics,  two  thousand  years  ago,  de- 
nounced the  clumsy  imposture,  but  they  were  silenced  by  the 
halter  and  the  sword.  It  has  taken  the  Christian  Church  nearly 
two  thousand  years  to  discover  that  the  sceptics  were  right. 
It  has  taken  the  church  two  thousand  years  of  evolution  in 
honesty  and  intelligence  to  throw  out  this  spurious  text.  It 
has  taken  the  church,  claiming  to  be  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  of  God,  twenty  hundred  years  in  which  to  acquire  the 
courage  and  love  of  truth  of  the  wicked  sceptics  who  first 
called  attention  to  this  lie  hiding  behind  an  apostle's  name. 
Reflect  upon  this !  After  using  every  means,  even  the  most 
cruel,  to  force  this  Trinitarian  text  upon  the  world,  the  Re- 
vised Version  blushes  with  shame  to  retain  it  any  longer. 

It  would  be  unnecessary  to  multiply  illustrations,  but  let 
my  readers  also  consult  the  words  in  the  margin  of  the  last 
chapter  of  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  in  the  Revised  Bible.  Eleven 
entire  verses  of  this  chapter  after  having  been  palmed  off  for 
two  thousand  years  as  the  word  of  God ;  after  being  repeatedly 
quoted  as  representing  God's  mind  on  matters  of  faith ;  after 
causing  untold  misery,  cruel  wars,  persecutions,  diabolical  tor- 
tures, and  more  than  all  these,  such  mental  anguish  in  millions 
of  sensitive  minds  as  no  repentance  can  atone  for, — these 
verses,  among  which  is  the  following:  "Go  ye  into  all  the 
world  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  whole  Creation.  .  .  . 
He  that  believeth  and  is  baptised  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned," — has  been  placed  under  an 
interrogation  mark.  Ah,  for  how  much  misery  is  the  above 
damnatory  clause  responsible!  How  many  lives  this  leprous 
falsehood  has  blasted!  How  this  cruel  imposture,  like  a  ma- 
lignant cancer,  ate  away  the  sound  parts  in  human  nature,  for 
twenty  long  centuries ! 

Among  these  eleven  verses  are  also  Jesus'  promise  of  mi- 
raculous power  to  his  disciples,  such  as  casting  out  devils, 
juggling  with  live  serpents,  drinking  deadly  poisons,  laying 
hands  on  the  sick, — which  has  filled  our  world  with  charlatans 
without  number.  But  now  comes  the  Revised  Version,  and 
quietly  dismisses  from  the  Word  of  God  these  eleven  Verses, 
with  these  words  in  the  margin:  "The  two  oldest  Greek 
manuscripts,  and  some  other  authorities,  omit  from  verse  9 


to  the  end  (verse  20).  Some  other  authorities  have  a  different 
ending  to  the  Gospel."  Read  the  above  carefully  and  reflect. 
The  old  translators  suppressed  all  this  information,  and  gave 
us  to  believe  that  we  were  not  only  reading  the  word  of  God, 
but  the  only  word  of  God  in  existence.  The  revisers  say, 
"Some  other  authorities  have  a  different  ending  to  the  Gospel/' 
Is  not  that  edifying?  How  did  they  decide  which  "ending  of 
the  Gospel"  to  print  as  the  Word  of  God?  And  why  did  the 
translators  of  the  Bible  wait  two  thousand  years  before  they 
gave  out  this  information?  Is  it  to  their  increasing  honesty 
that  we  owe  this  admission,  or  is  it  the  increasing  power  of 
the  non-churchgoing  world  which  has  compelled  this  admis- 
sion from  their  lips?  Yes,  yes,  pause  and  think  of  how  an 
organization  must  have  become  gangrened  with  imposture  to 
have  successfully  resisted  every  claim  of  truth  and  honor  for 
two  thousand  years !  This  is  a  question  of  conscience  as  well 
as  a  question  of  knowledge.  Why  did  the  translators  suppress 
the  fact  until  a  few  years  ago  that,  "Some  other  authorities 
have  a  different  ending  to  the  Gospel"?,  and  that  "the  two 
oldest  Greek  manuscripts  and  some  other  authorities  omit 
from  verse  9  to  the  end"?  Time  forbids  me  to  give  other 
illustrations  of  the — I  regret  to  say  it — manipulations  of  the 
Word  of  God  by  its  custodians.  The  heart  bleeds  with  min- 
gled pain  and  indignation  at  the  temerity  and  effrontery  of 
the  pious  crew,  who,  to  advance  their  "ism"  or  to  make  con- 
verts, did  not  hesitate  to  pervert  history. 

For  two  thousand  years,  for  anyone  to  dare  breathe  a 
word  against  this  Bible-inventing  party,  meant  hell  here  and 
hereafter.  Mark  Antony  invited  Rome  to  weep  over  the 
prostrate  form  of  assassinated  Caesar.  I  wish  I  could  pro- 
voke you  to  a  burning  blush  of  indignation  over  the  prostrate 
majesty  of  Europe  and  America  at  the  feet  of  these  uncon- 
scionable inventors  of  inspired  texts.  Blessed  be  the  day 
which  humbled  the  pride  of  the  ecclesiastic,  and  wrested  from 
his  hands  the  power  to  suppress  the  truth ! 

But  aside   from   doctoring  their  own   Gospels,  the  early 

Christians  did  not  hesitate  to  submit  the  writings  of  the  great 

pagans,— Seneca,  Pliny,  Tacitus,  Suetonious,  Marcus  Aurelius 

and  the  Jewish  historian,  Josephus,  to  the  same  indignity,  by 

ii 


slipping  passages  into  their  works  favorable  to  the  Christian 
religion.  Perhaps  I  am  to  be  blamed  for  taking  this  matter 
so  seriously,  but  how  can  I  help  it?  I  feel  the  wrong,  the 
shame,  and  the  crime  of  it,  deep  in  my  bones — when  I  picture 
to  myself  an  Asiatic  scribbler,  a  sectarian,  a  clown,  a  rogue,  a 
cheat,  tampering  with  the  works  of  a  dead  master, — pushing 
and  squeezing  his  imposture  into  the  mouth  of  the  mighty 
dead, — defiling  the  thought  of  the  philosopher  with  the  foul- 
ness of  his  superstition !  It  makes  my  heart  rise  and  knock 
with  vehemence  against  my  ribs  until  I  feel  as  if  they  would 
break.  Not  only  were  individual  passages  invented  and  slipped 
into  the  Pagan  writings,  but  a  number  of  books  were  written 
and  attributed  to  the  greatest  shining  lights  of  the  old  Roman 
world.  Dr.  Gieseler,  a  prominent  Christian  historian  of  mod- 
ern Germany,  who  has  made,  as  most  German  students  do,  a 
painstaking  study  of  the  early  centuries,  says  that,  when  the 
Christians  were  accused  of  inventing  manuscripts,  they 
"quieted  their  consciences  respecting  the  forgery  with  the  idea 
of  their  good  intentions."  "It  was  an  age  of  literary  fraud," 
declares  Bishop  Ellicott. 

There  is  shown  at  the  library  in  Jena,  a  letter  purported  to 
have  been  written  by  Publius  Lentulus,  the  supposed  prede- 
cessor of  Pontius  Pilate.  The  impostor  who  concocted  this 
epistle  and  affixed  the  signature  of  a  Roman  governor  to  it, 
makes  him  tell  the  Roman  Senate,  "that  there  had  appeared 
(in  Judea)  a  man  endowed  with  great  powers,  whose  name  is 
Jesus  Christ."  The  earmarks  of  fraud  are  so  plain  that  even 
the  orthodox  are  ashamed  of  this  clumsy  manufacture.  An- 
other Gospel  is  attributed  to  Pontius  Pilate.  Nicodemus  is 
made  the  author  of  still  another.  The  Emperor  Aurelius,  is 
made  to  recommend  the  Christians  to  the  Senate  for  their 
valor;  Tiberius  even  gives  his  testimony  in  their  favor;  Jesus, 
himself,  is  made  the  author  of  a  treatise  in  his  own  behalf; 
the  Virgin  Mary  writes  the  story  of  her  wonderful  child; 
Adam,  even,  testifies  to  the  truth  of  the  Christian  religion, 
though  he  is  supposed  to  have  lived  nearly  four  thousand  years 
before  Jesus.  There  is  no  end  to  the  list  of  inventions. 

But  one  of  the  most  daring  forgeries  is  the  following  pas- 
sage in  Josephus : 


"About  that  time  appeared  Jesus,  a  wise  man,  if  in- 
deed it  be  right  to  speak  of  him  as  a  man,  for  he  was  a 
performer  of  wonderful  works,  a  teacher  of  such  men  as 
receive  the  truth  with  pleasure.  He  drew  after  him  many 
of  the  Jews  as  well  as  of  the  Gentiles.  This  same  was  the 
Christ.  And  though  Pilate,  by  the  judgment  of  the  chief 
rulers  among  us,  delivered  him  up  to  be  crucified  .  . 
he  showed  himself  alive  on  the  third  day  .  .  ." 


That  this  famous  passage  in  Josephus  is  an  interpolation, 
is  now  generally  admitted.  Breaking  suddenly  in  the  midst 
of  a  paragraph,  the  great  Jewish  historian  pauses  to  announce 
that  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  and  that  he  reall)  rose  from  the 
dead,  etc.,  etc.  This,  if  true,  makes  Josephus  a  Christian, 
which  he  was  not.  The  early  fathers,  Justin  Martyr,  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  and  Origen,  never  referred  to  this  famous  pas- 
sage, which  they  certainly  would  have  done,  had  such  a  pas- 
sage existed.  What  better  evidence  could  they  desire  in  their 
controversy  with  the  Jews  than  to  point  to  this  wonderful 
confession  of  their  principal  author  and  historian,  that  the 
Jesus  whom  they  crucified  was  the  Christ,  and  that  he  rose 
from  the  dead!  But  in  the  Josephus  with  which  they  were 
acquainted  there  was  no  such  text.  Origen,  the  Christian 
Father,  admits  in  his  writings  that  Josephus  was  not  a  believer 
in  Christ.  How,  then,  did  this  passage  creep  into  the  works 
of  the  Jewish  historian?  The  man  who  discovered  this  pas- 
sage in  Josephus  was  the  same  man  who  invented  Constantine's 
vision,  and  the  fable  of  the  Seventy,  who,  he  says,  shut  up 
in  seventy  separate  cells,  produced  the  Septuagint  translation 
of  the  Old  Testament,  a  translation,  which,  he  adds,  was  surely 
the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  because  when  the  Seventy  sepa- 
rate translations  were  compared,  they  were  found  to  be  in 
every  detail  alike,  without  even  the  difference  of  a  punctuation 
mark  in  them  all.  To  further  prove  this  story,  Eusebius  tells 
us  that  he  himself  saw  the  seventy  cells  which  the  translators 
had  occupied  four  hundred  years  before.  This  is  the  kind  of 
churchman  who  first  discovered  the  Josephus  passage.  After 
quoting  the  interpolated  passage,  Eusebius  wonders  how  any 
Jew  can  have  the  impudence  not  to  believe  that  Jesus  was  the 
Christ.  In  one  of  his  essays,  De  Quincy  says  that  only  lunatics 
now  believe  in  the  genuineness  of  this  passage,  while  a  bishop 

13 


of  the  Anglican  Church, — Warburton — calls  it  "a  stupid  for- 
gery." 

But  the  early  Christians  made  even  the  pagan  gods  to  tes- 
tify for  Jesus.  They  composed  verses  in  praise  of  the  Christian 
religion  and  attributed  them  to  the  pagan  Sibyls.  The  oracles 
of  Rome  were  made  to  prophesy  the  coming  of  Christ, — his 
passion,  and  resurrection,  and  to  admit  their  inferiority  to 
him.  For  many  hundred  years  these  Sibylline  verses  were 
quoted  as  genuine,  until  the  advancement  of  education  laughed 
the  disgraceful  fabrication  out  of  existence. 

Again,  pious  ecclesiastics  in  their  zeal  for  their  "ism,"  in- 
vented also  an  Apostles'  Creed,  which  the  apostles  never  saw, 
and  an  Apostolic  Constitution,  containing  directions  how  a 
Christian  Church  or  State  should  be  governed.  They  invented 
also  the  Decretal  Epistles,  by  which  Constantine  transfers  all 
his  property  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome, — his  sword,  his  diadem, 
his  throne, — and  makes  a  prince  of  the  pope,  and  an  empire 
of  his  church.  Here  is  the  passage  which  was  forged  into 
Constantine's  mouth  by  the  Spanish  priest  Isidore : 

"We  ascribe  to  the  See  of  St.  Peter  all  dignity,  all  glory, 
all  imperial  power.  .  .  .  Besides,  we  give  to  Sylvester 
(bishop  of  Rome)  and  his  successor,  our  palace  of  the 
Lateran  which  is  beyond  question  the  most  beautiful  place 
on  earth.  We  give  him  our  crown,  our  mitre,  our  diadem, 
and  all  our  imperial  vestments;  we  remit  to  him  the  im- 
perial dignity.  We  give  as  a  pure  gift,  to  the  holy  pontiff, 
the  city  of  Rome  and  all  the  Western  cities  of  Italy,  as 
well  as  the  Western  cities  of  other  countries.  In  order 
to  give  place  to  him,  we  yield  our  dominion  over  all  these 
provinces  by  removing  the  seat  of  our  empire  to  Byzan- 
tium, considering  it  not  right  that  a  terrestial  emperor 
should  preserve  the  least  power  where  God  had  established 
the  head  of  religion." 

How  lovely !  No  wonder  that  Cardinal  Newman  regarded 
Constantine  as  a  pattern  for  all  future  monarchs. 

But  enough!  Let  us  draw  the  curtain  upon  that  early 
Christian  age  of  invention  and  imposture.  Why  was  it,  we 
ask  again,  that  Europe  became  a  market  for  forgeries,  imme- 
diately after  its  conversion  to  the  Asiatic  cult? 

Yet  we  must  not  forget  that  hand  in  hand  with  this  dishon- 
est work  of  invention,  went  the  shameful  destruction  of  what- 


ever  was  deemed  unfavorable  to  the  new  religion.  Many  of 
the  masterpieces  of  pagan  literature  were  destroyed  when  they 
could  not  be  tampered  with.  The  rare  volumes  of  history, 
philosophy  and  poetry  were  reduced  to  ashes,  that  they  might 
not  live  to  bear  witness  to  the  greatness  of  the  pre-Christian 
world.  Even  as  they  destroyed  the  monuments  and  temples 
of  Athens  and  Rome,  they  destroyed  also  the  precious  manu- 
scripts of  Greek  and  Roman  authors.  From  the  following 
confession  of  St.  Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan,  we  may  gauge 
the  temper  of  the  early  Christian  Church:  "I  myself  would 
willingly  assume  the  guilt  (of  destroying  pagan  buildings) 
and  say  that  'I  have  set  them  in  flames  that  there  may  be  not 
a  place  left  in  which  Chris.t  is  denied.'  " 

Let  us  now  briefly,  tell  the  story  of  the  invention  of  the 
Old  Testament:  When  Moses  finished  writing  the  book  of 
the  law,  he  called  the  elders  of  the  people  before  him  and 
commanded  them  to  "take  the  book  of  the  law  and  put  it  into 
the  side"  or  the  inside  "of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord 
your  God,  that  it  may  be  there  for  a  witness."  The  ark  was 
a  chest  or  box  constructed  after  specific  directions  from  God, 
and  was  placed  in  the  holy  place  in  the  temple,  under  or  behind 
a  veil,  which  also  covered  the  mercy  seat  upon  the  ark.  As 
you  must  know,  even  Aaron  the  high  priest  was  cautioned 
against  approaching  this  place  too  often,  for  it  was  very  holy. 
According  to  this  account,  God  gives  a  book  to  his  people,  but 
he  locks  it  up  in  a  box,  and  places  the  box  behind  a  veil,  then 
fixes  a  seat  upon  the  box  which  He  Himself,  occupies.  How 
could  the  people,  under  these  circumstances,  get  at  the  book? 
But  it  was  not  meant  that  they  should.  Ah,  we  have  here  a 
fine  illustration  of  what  we  may  call  the  craft  of  the  priest, 
or  priestcraft.  They  announce  a  revelation  from  God,  but 
they  will  not  permit  anyone  to  take  it  home  and  read  it.  It 
is  locked  up  in  a  box,  and  God  himself  is  made  to  sit  on  the 
box. 

The  grass  dies  without  air  and  light.  The  birds  pine  away 
in  a  cage.  Even  the  worms  which  creep  in  damp  holes,  come 
out  for  a  glimpse  of  the  light,  now  and  then ;  but  the  word  of 
God  hides  in  the  darkness  of  the  ark,  and  fears  the  searching 
gaze  of  man !  Was  it  born  to  be  buried  in  a  wooden  tomb, — 


born  to  be  locked  up  in  a  shittim-wood  chest, — born  to  blink 
at  the  light !  Ah,  the  precious  priests !  The  sun  may  be  seen 
by  everybody,  the  stars  shine  in  the  open,  but  the  Word  of 
God,  like  a  bashful  maid,  shrinks  from  observation,  and  sneaks 
into  a  closet.  To  this  day,  the  Catholics  have  to  go  to  a 
closet — that  is  to  say  they  have  to  secure  permission,  before 
they  can  read  the  Word  of  God.1 

To  show  that  we  have  Bible  authority  for  the  statements 
made  above,  we  will  quote  from  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy, 
chapter  xxxi,  verse  24,  etc. : 

"And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Moses  had  made  an  end  of 
writing  the  words  of  this  law  in  a  book,  until  they  were 
finished.  That  Moses  commanded  the  Levites  which  bare 
the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  of  the  Lord,  saying:  Take  this 
book  of  the  law,  and  put  it  in  the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant  of  the  Lord,  your  God,  that  it  may  be  there  for 
a  witness  against  thee." 

The  directions  are  specific.  And  the  people's  reverence 
for  the  ark  or  the  chest  containing  the  inspired  words  of  God 
increased  a  thousandfold. 

Let  us  continue:  The  book  of  the  law  is  now  in  the  box, 
with  the  lid  closed,  and  the  deity  sitting  on  the  lid.  Surely, 
it  will  be  impossible  for  the  book  ever  to  get  lost.  But  it 
did  get  lost.  We  will  tell  its  story  presently.  But  first  let 
us  speak  of  the  jealousy  with  which  the  priests  watched  the 
ark.  In  times  of  war  when  the  Jews  were  compelled  to  move 
the  ark  from  one  place  to  another,  everybody  was  strictly  for- 
bidden from  touching  it,  or  looking  into  it.  On  one  occasion, 
while  they  had  the  chest  containing  the  two  tables  of  stone 
and  the  Book  of  the  Law,  on  an  ox-cart,  moving  it  to  a  place 
of  safety,  the  cart  jostled  and  the  ark  tipped.  One  of  the 
drivers,  Uzzah,  instinctively,  put  forth  his  hand  to  steady  the 
sacred  chest.  He  was  instantly  killed.  He  touched  the  ark, 
and  that  was  a  crime.  One  must  not  even  touch  the  box  to 
save  it  from  falling,  much  less  read  and  investigate  the  book 
hidden  therein.  Every  precaution  was  taken  to  protect  the 
Bible  from  being  investigated.  God  did  not  guard  the  tree  of 


'See  Saladin's  God  and  His  Book. 
16 


knowledge  more  zealously  than  did  the  priests  the  book  of  the 
law. 

There  were  some  people,  however,  who  were  curious 
enough  to  peep  into  the  ark,  in  spite  of  the  threats  of  the 
rabbis.  To  scare  these  people,  the  awful  words, — sacrilege, 
impiety,  profanity, — blasphemy, — were  invented.  When  these 
failed,  murder  was  resorted  to.  Listen  to  this  story:  The 
people  of  Beth-Shemesh,  being  of  an  inquiring  mind,  one 
day,  they  approached  the  ark  and  peeped  into  it,  or  tried  to. 
Well;  riot  and  massacre  followed!  The  Lord  "smote  the 
men  of  Beth-Shemesh  because  they  had  looked  into  the  ark  of 
the  Lord,  even  he  smote  of  the  people  fifty  thousand  and 
three  score  and  ten  men," — fifty  thousand  and  seventy.  The 
rabbis  charged  this  wholesale  massacre  to  the  deity.  All  suc- 
cessful murderers  do  the  same.  But  we  must  admit  the  priests 
took  excellent  care  of  the  ark  and  its  contents.  Unfortunately, 
however,  it  is  now  nearly  three  thousand  years  since  the  ark 
was  last  heard  of.  Where  is  it  now? 

But  to  return  to  our  story : 

Many  years  after  the  time  we  are  now  speaking  of,  when 
King  Solomon  finished  his  magnificent  temple,  in  Jerusalem, 
he  ordered  the  ark  to  be  opened.  How  he  dared  to  disobey 
the  priests,  I  cannot  tell,  but  kings  enjoy  special  privileges, 
and  perhaps,  he  had  never  heard  that  there  was  a  prohibition 
against  even  touching  the  ark.  When  the  ark  was  opened, 
lo !  and  behold !  the  Book  of  the  Law  which  Moses  had  com- 
manded to  be  put  inside  the  ark  was  not  there. 

//  n'as  not  there! 

In  2nd  Kings,  eighth  chapter,  ninth  verse,  we  read  that 
when  they  opened  the  ark : 

"There  was  nothing  in  the  ark  save  the  two  tables  of 
stone." 

In  other  words,  the  book  which  we  read  about  in  the 
former  quotation  from  the  Bible,  and  which  contained  most 
valuable  divine  instructions  to  the  people,  had  disappeared. 
The  ark  contained  only  two  stones,  which  too,  in  due  time, 
went  the  way  of  the  book,  and  no  one  knows  where  they  are 
at  the  present  time.  Ark  and  stones  and  book,  as  they  are 

17 


nowhere  to  be  found,  there  is  a  bare  possibility  that  they  have 
returned  to  heaven  whence  they  came. 

But  let  us  follow  the  story:    The  book  was  not  in  the  ark. 

What  fate  had  befallen  it?  Was  it  never  put  there ?  When 
Uzzah,  and  the  five  thousand  and  seventy  men  were  killed  for 
touching  the  ark,  was  it  empty  ?  Solomon  had  the  lid  of  the 
chest  removed,  and  he  found  therein  no  "Book  of  the  Law," 
which  was  ordered  to  be  placed  there  "as  a  witness." 

Then  followed  a  stretch  of  centuries  in  which  the  Book  of 
the  Law  is  not  heard  of.  Oblivion  now  began  to  spread  its 
dusty  wings  upon  the  memory  of  it.  Yet,  suggests  Saladin, 
the  old  world  jogged  along  as  usual;  the  sun  rose  and  set; 
the  moon,  as  ever  before  shed  its  romantic  light  upon  sea  and 
shore.  Lovers  paired,  and  children,  like  a  flock  of  swallows, 
visited  our  earth.  They  toiled,  grew  old  and  died — without 
any  Book  of  the  Law. 

There  is  a  third  chapter  in  the  biography  of  the  Bible. 
Three  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  Solomon  had  fallen  asleep 
with  his  fathers,  one  morning, — I  cannot  tell  whether  it  was 
on  a  fair  or  on  a  foul  day,  Hilkiah, — remember  that  name, — 
Hilkiah!  the  high  priest,  knocked  on  the  door  of  Shaphan, 
King  Josiah's  private  secretary,  and  begged  for  a  private 
interview, — a  tete-a-tete,  as  the  French  would  say.  Leaning 
over,  he  whispered  in  the  ears  of  the  King's  minister,  slowly 
and  solemnly,  as  one  who  is  burdened  with  some  compelling 
news, — that — he — had — just — found — "The  Book  of  the  Law" 
which  had  been  lost  for  three  hundred  and  fifty  years ! 

The  two  men  paused  and  looked  at  each  other  for  a  mo- 
ment. Yes,  Hilkiah,  the  high  priest,  had  found  the  book 
which  had  been  lost  for  three  hundred  and  fifty  years !  And 
where  ?  In  the  Temple !  Had  the  king's  minister  been  in  an 
inquiring  mood,  he  might  have  asked  some  questions :  Was 
the  book  lying  there  all  these  years  and  not  a  man  stumbled 
upon  it?  Or  was  it  just  put  there  for  Hilkiah  to  find  it?  If 
it  had  been  lost  for  three  hundred  years  or  more,  how  could 
Hilkiah  tell  that  the  book  he  found  was  the  same  that  Moses 
wrote  and  ordered  kept  in  the  shittim-wood  chest?  If  Hil- 
kiah made  any  changes  in  the  book,  how  is  the  world  to 
know  which  is  Hilkiah's  and  which  is  Moses'  contribution  to 
the  Bible?  But  the  questions  were  not  asked.  Besides,  faith 


can  shut  its  small  eye  to  even  greater  difficulties  than  are  in- 
volved in  Hilkiah's  discovery. 

When  the  King  heard  this  extraordinary  news,  he  must 
have  doubted  the  word  of  the  high  priest,  for  he  appointed  a 
committee,  whose  names  are  given  in  the  Bible,  to  present  a 
report  on  this  newly-found  book.  What  did  the  committee 
do?  Did  it  study  the  book?  Did  it  invite  native  and  foreign 
scholars  to  pronounce  upon  it?  Did  it  encourage  the  noblest, 
bravest,  most  truthful  men  and  women  in  the  world  to  express 
their  free  opinion  about  it,  or  to  cross-examine  the  high  priest  ? 
Indeed  not !  The  committee  took  the  book  and  went  to  a 
medium.  They  believed  that  the  prophetess  Huldah,  the 
medium,  or  the  witch,  was  the  sole  person  capable  of  passing 
upon  the  genuineness  of  inspired  documents.  No  thinker,  no 
conscientious  student,  patiently  collecting  facts,  and  fearlessly 
exposing  error,  could  compare  with  the  witch  Huldah  in  in- 
spiration. She  was  to  the  Jewish  nation,  at  this  time,  what 
Plato  and  Aristotle  were  to  the  heathen  Greeks.  Huldah,  the 
medium,  represented  the  highest  culture  of  the  country  and 
its  people.  She  was  the  one  light  in  Jerusalem.  The  confi- 
dence of  Minot,  Savage,  Heber,  Newton  and  publisher  Funk, 
in  Mrs.  Piper,  is  not  a  circumstance  to  the  faith  of  King 
Josiah's  committee  in  prophetess  Huldah.  And  she  did  not 
require  time  to  study  the  book,  or  to  make  investigations. 
What  kind  of  a  prophetess  would  she  have  been  if  she  could 
not  answer  any  questions  offhand  ? 

Of  course,  Huldah's  opinion  was  the  Lord's  opinion,  be- 
cause she  began  her  decision  with  the  words,  "Thus  saith  the 
Lord."  And  although,  like  all  mediums,  she  is  very  careful 
not  to  commit  herself,  she  seems  to  have  satisfied  the  dele- 
gation from  the  King  that  the  priest,  Hilkiah,  had  found  the 
lost  book  of  the  law.  For  some  reason  which  we  are  unable 
to  divine  the  book  was  not  put  back  into  the  Ark.  Perhaps 
they  had  found  a  safer  place. 

How  do  Christian  scholars  explain  this  Hilkiah  episode? 
Let  us  quote  from  the  Encyclopedia  Biblica,  one  of  the  best 
known  commentaries  on  the  Bible : — "What  led  Hilkiah  to  say 
that  he  had  found  the  Book  of  the  Law  is  not  recorded."  Per- 
haps it  was  not  convenient  to  do  so:  "He  may  merely  have 
meant,"  adds  the  commentator,  feeling  fearfully  the  strain  of 

19 


his  orthodoxy,  "Here  is  the  best  and  fullest  law-book,  about 
which  thou  hast  been  asking."  Is  not  this  ingenious?  "I  have 
found  the  Book  of  the  Law,"  may  only  have  meant,  according 
to  this  clergyman's  interpretation,  "Here  is  the  best  and  fullest 
law-book  about  which  thou  hast  been  asking."  But  why  should 
Hilkiah  have  meant  one  thing  and  said  another?  And  what 
about  the  fact  that  Solomon  failed  to  find  the  Book  of  the  Law 
in  the  Ark,  and  that  for  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  there  is 
silence  about  this  same  book  ?  And  why  did  they  go  to  medium 
Huldah,  if  everybody  knew  what  the  book  was?  But  the  ex- 
planations of  the  orthodox  scholars  which  I  have  quoted  prove 
what  I  said  about  the  believer  being  compelled  to  twist  and 
cramp  his  conscience  even  worse  than  the  reputed  authors  of 
the  Scriptures  have  done,  in  order  to  smooth  over  the  offenses 
against  truth  and  honor  in  the  Bible. 

The  authors  of  the  Encyclopedia  Biblica  are  among  the 
most  scholarly  and  progressive  of  the  Christian  clergy,  and 
their  answer  to  questions  about  the  High  Priest  Hilkiah  is 
as  good  as  can  be  expected,  under  the  circumstances.  But 
we  know  of  a  safer  answer  than  that — silence. 

There  is  a  concluding  chapter  in  the  history  of  the  Bible. 
It  appears  that  when  Jerusalem  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Per- 
sians, the  city  was  pillaged,  the  temple  destroyed,  and  the 
Book  of  the  Law  which  Hilkiah  had  discovered,  was  burned. 
Once  more,  Israel  is  without  a  book.  Driven  into  captivity, 
the  Jews  lived  among  the  heathen  without  a  temple  and  with- 
out a  bible.  Then  Cyrus,  the  King  of  Persia,  is  represented 
in  the  book  of  Ezra,  as  issuing  a  proclamation  to  the  Jews 
to  return  to  their  country  and  rebuild  the  temple  in  Jerusalem. 
At  this  time,  Cyrus,  graciously  delivered  to  the  Jews  "the  ves- 
sels of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  which  Nebuchadnezzar  had 
brought  out  of  Jerusalem,  and  had  put  them  in  the  house  of 
his  gods."  Among  the  articles  restored  to  the  Temple,  no 
mention  is  made  of  the  Book  of  the  Law.  But  Ezra,  who 
is  called  "a  scribe  of  the  words  of  the  commandment  of  the 
Lord,"  appears  to  have  not  only  rebuilt  the  temple,  but  also 
to  have  restored  the  burned  Book  of  the  Law.  In  forty  days, 
by  the  help  of  forty  associates,  everything  that  was  ever  re- 
ported to  have  been  done  of  the  Lord  was  put  to  writing  and 
read  aloud  to  the  congregation  which  kept  standing  as  Ezra 


read  to  them.     Such   is   the   story  in   the  Book  of  Esdras. 

That  Ezra  was  the  restorer  of  the  destroyed  law  seems 
to  have  been  the  opinion  of  almost  all  the  early  church  Fathers. 
"Whether  you  choose  to  call  Moses  the  author  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, or  Ezra  the  restorer  of  the  same  book,  I  make  no  ob- 
jection," wrote  St.  Jerome.  Clement,  of  Alexandria,  another 
church  Father,  writes,  that,  "The  writings  having  been  de- 
stroyed, Ezra,  the  Levite,  having  become  inspired,  prophesied, 
restoring  again  all  the  old  writings."  Eusebius  and  Irenaeus 
seem  to  be  of  the  same  opinion,  and  the  famous  Tertullian,  a 
pillar  of  the  church,  gives  his  testimony  that,  "Jerusalem 
having  been  destroyed  by  the  Babylonian  siege,  it  appears  that 
every  instrument  of  Jewish  literature  was  restored  by  Esdras." 

If  Esdras,  indeed,  restored  the  burned  book,  which  Hilkiah 
had  found  in  the  Temple  after  it  had  been  lost  for  three  hun- 
dred and  fifty  years,  then,  the  question  whether  Moses  was 
inspired  or  not, — a  question  which  has  vexed  the  world  so 
much — loses  all  its  importance.  Was  Ezra  inspired?  That 
is  the  crucial  question?  If  he  was  not,  how  can  Moses'  in- 
spiration help  us  since  his  writings  were  burned  by  the  Per- 
sians, even  if  they  were  not  stolen  from  the  ark  and  revised 
by  Hilkiah?  The  inventor  of  the  Old  Testament  was  Ezra, 
"a  scribe  of  the  words  of  the  commandment  of  the  Lord," 
that  is  to  say,  the  clerk  or  amanuensis  of  God,  a  title  which 
aptly  describes  not  the  interpreter,  but  the  author  of  the  Book 
of  the  Law.  What  kind  of  a  man  was  this  compiler  or  in- 
ventor of  the  Book  of  the  Law?  What  does  Christian  Schol- 
arship think  of  his  character?  Let  us  hear  the  doctors  of 
divinity  on  Ezra. 

The  authors  of  the  Encyclopedia  Biblica  whom  we  have 
already  quoted,  admit  that  the  man  who  bears  the  name  of 
Ezra  manipulated,  if  he  did  not  invent,  the  narrative  which 
he  tells  in  the  Bible : — "He  partly  mutilates  it  by  removing  a 
portion,  partly  makes  it  almost  unintelligible  by  placing  it  in  a 
connection  to  which  it  does  not  belong,  and  by  making  interpo- 
lations, etc."  Could  we  ask  for  a  stronger  proof  that  the  Bible 
is  the  work  of  men — and  not  of  honest  men,  at  that?  But  is 
it  fair  to  include  the  whole  Bible  in  this  accusation?  I  wish 
I  could  feel  that  some  portions  of  the  Bible  are  free  from  sus- 
picion, but  I  cannot.  Alas !  it  is  impossible  to  point  to  a  single 


book  in  the  Bible  of  the  authorship  of  which  we  may  speak 
with  assurance.  The  marks  of  political  and  theological  im- 
posture in  the  Bible  are  like  leopard's  spots,  they  cannot  be 
removed. 

Well !  It  must  not  be  thought  that  we  have  now  disarmed 
the  bibliolaters.  They  have  still  a  powerful  weapon  left  with 
which  to  defend  the  Bible :  Suppose  Ezra  did  compose  or  com- 
pile the  Book!  Is  it  not,  nevertheless,  true  that  the  Bible 
teaches  righteousness  ?  The  argument  is  something  like  this : 
The  Bible  may  not  be  true,  but  it  is  very  moral.  In  our  opin- 
ion, however,  it  is  even  less  moral  than  it  is  true.  A  book 
which  commands  murder,  plunder,  persecution  for  opinion 
sake,  slavery  and  credulity  of  the  most  abject  kind,  can  not 
very  well  be  recommended  as  a  moral  text-book.  Of  course, 
there  are  in  the  Bible,  as  also  in  the  Vedas  or  the  Koran,  splen- 
did passages  of  truth  and  beauty,  but  by  selecting  only  one  set 
of  passages  and  ignoring  the  rest  any  book  could  be  made  pure. 

Matthew  Arnold  professes  to  have  discovered  in  the  Old 
Bible  "the  Eternal,  not  ourselves,  making  for  Righteousness," 
one  of  his  proofs  being  Ps.  50 123 :  "To  him  that  ordereth  his 
conversation  right  shall  be  shown  the  salvation  of  God."  But 
the  Revised  Version  has  robbed  the  Oxford  professor  of  his 
text  by  completely  changing  its  meaning:  "Whoso  offereth 
the  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  glorifieth  me,  and  prepareth  a  way 
that  I  may  show  him  the  salvation  of  God"  (See  margin  of 
Revised  Version).  There  is  nothing  in  the  original  about 
"ordering  one's  conduct  or  conversation  right,"  it  was  put 
there  by  the  translators  whose  moral  culture  was  far  superior 
to  the  authors  they  were  rendering  into  English. 

Moreover,  Matthew  Arnold,  fully  conceding  the  conclu- 
sions of  the  "higher  critics,"  e.  g.,  that  the  events  narrated  in 
the  Bible  are  in  most  cases  pure  fabrications ;  that  they  are  the 
work  of  myth-mongers  who  sought  to  pass  as  genuine  and 
divine,  documents  which  they  had  themselves  forged  for  par- 
tisan purposes — who  plagiarized  from  Assyrian  liturgies,  and 
wilfully  misrepresented  as  well  as  interpolated  the  history  of 
their  nation — asks  us,  nevertheless,  to  look  upon  these  political 
schemers  and  poseurs,  as  having  but  one  all-consuming  pas- 
sion— righteousness ! 

In  conclusion :    The  inspiration  of  the  Bible  is  not  a  ques- 


tion  of  belief,  it  is  a  question  of  evidence.  If  believing  a  book 
inspired  could  make  it  so,  then,  the  books  of  Mohammed  and 
Buddha,  of  Confucius  and  Zoroaster,  must  be  inspired  too. 
In  fact,  any  book  could  be  made  infallible,  if  believing  it  to 
be  so,  were  all  that  was  required.  But  does  the  evidence  which 
I  have  offered  prove  that  the  Bible  was  invented?  I  sincerely 
believe  it  does,  but  still,  I  may  be  mistaken,  and  am  therefore 
open  to  any  evidence  which  may  be  furnished  that  the  four 
gospels,  for  instance,  were  not  invented  by  religious  partisans, 
who,  while  suppressing  their  own  names,  paraded  those  of  the 
apostles  as  their  real  authors,  notwithstanding  that  the  apostles 
had  been  dead  long  ago.  I  shall  consider,  conscientiously, 
any  evidence  which  might  be  furnished  that  Ezra  was  not  the 
real  reproducer,  if  not  the  original  author  of  the  Jewish  code, 
after  his  return  from  Babylonia.  And,  I  promise  to  retract  and 
apologize  for  the  position  I  have  maintained  in  this  lecture, 
if  the  theologians,  who  are  at  home  on  this  subject,  will  prove 
that  there  were  no  spurious  gospels,  no  impostures,  no  lying 
manuscripts  thrown  upon  the  religious  market  as  soon  as 
the  pagan  state  embraced  Christianity,  I  will  also  listen  to 
any  arguments  which  may  be  produced  to  show  that  the 
Apostles'  Creed  was  written  by  the  apostles ;  that  Constantine 
abdicated  in  favor  of  the  pope ;  that  the  Pagan  Sibyls  pro- 
phesied of  Christ,  and  that  Josephus  acknowledged  Jesus  to 
have  been  the  Messiah. 

I  sincerely  trust  some  learned  divine  into  whose  hands  this 
lecture  might  fall,  will  present  the  other  side,  if  he  thinks 
there  is  another  side,  of  the  story  I  have  presented.  By  the 
word  invented  it  is  not  meant  that  the  names,  events,  etc.,  were 
all  manufactured,  but  that  stories  borrowed  largely  from 
mythical  sources  were  edited  and  altered  to  serve  partisan  and 
political  purposes. 

And  why  have  I  told  this  story? 

Do  you  know  of  any  good  reason,  reader,  why  every  other 
subject  may  be  independently  discussed  or  investigated,  except 
religion?  And  do  you  know  why,  if  Shakespeare  can  stand 
criticism,  the  Bible  should  shrink  from  it? 

If  it  is  possible  to  disagree  with,  or  to  advance  beyond, 
Plato,  Socrates,  Spencer,  Darwin,  Goethe,  Emerson, — please ! 
why  is  it  a  heresy  to  differ  from  Moses,  Solomon,  Jonah  or 

23 


Jesus?    Why  is  it  proper  to  disagree  with  a  Greek  or  a  Ro- 
man, but  blasphemy  to  disagree  with  a  Jew? 

The  Bible  has  for  centuries  blocked  the  way  of  progress. 
As  an  infallible  book  it  has  enslaved  conscience,  and  encour- 
aged intolerance.  To  defend  its  many  puerilities,  and  even 
immoral  tales,  men  have  resorted  to  casuistry  and  dissimula- 
tion. I  believe  that  men  will  be  more  honest,  more  tolerant, 
more  progressive,  more  independent  and  more  manly,  if  they 
could  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  the  Bible.  To  over- 
throw its  tyranny  and  to  prove  that  a  book  can  not  be  the 
master  of  living  and  growing  men,  to  make  man  free,  to  raise 
him  from  his  knees,  to  bring  back  the  color  to  his  cheeks  white 
with  fear,  and  to  give  to  his  arrested  mind  movement — is  my 
aim  and  my  joy!1 

"Those  who  wish  to  read  further  on  this  subject  should  consult 
the  author's  The  Truth  About  Jesus — Is  He  a  Myth? 


Publications  by  the  Same  Author 

A  NEW  CATECHISM.  Fifth  Edition,  Revised  and  En- 
larged, with  Portrait  of  Author,  $1.00. 

THE  TRUTH  ABOUT  JESUS:    IS  HE  A  MYTH?    A  new 
book  of  295  pages.     Illustrated. 
Cloth $1.00.      Paper $0.50. 

MANGASARIAN-CRAPSEY  DEBATE  ON  THE  HIS- 
TORICITY OF  JESUS.  25c. 

PEARLS.  (New  Edition)  Brave  Thoughts  from  Brave 
Minds.  Selected  and  arranged  by  M.  M.  Mangasarian. 
25c. 

Lectures 

10  cents  a  Copy 

THE  CHURCH  IN  POLITICS— AMERICANS  BEWARE! 
WOMAN     SUFFRAGE,     OR     THE     CHILD-BEARING 

WOMAN  AND  CIVILIZATION. 
THE     KINGDOM     OF     GOD     IN     GENEVA     UNDER 

CALVIN. 

THE  MARTYRDOM  OF  HYPATIA. 
MORALITY  WITHOUT  GOD. 

WHAT  WAS  THE  RELIGION  OF  SHAKESPEARE. 
CHRISTIAN  SCIENCE  ANALYZED  AND  ANSWERED. 
THE     RELIGION     OF     WASHINGTON,     JEFFERSON 

AND  FRANKLIN. 


PUBLICATIONS 

or  

M.     M.     MANGASARIAN 

Orchestra   Hall   Building 


A  NEW  CATECHISM 

<  'initainiiiL:  M\  new  chapters,  making  altogether  22  chapters,  witli 
an  introduction,  and  a  photograph  of  the  author,  bound  in  cloth, 
270  pages.  Fourth  edition.  Price,  one  dollar 

AN    OPINION 

I  lolyoake,  of  England,  the  friend  and  neigh- 
this  of  "A   New   Cate- 

"It  is  tl>.  boldest.  the  brightest,  tKe  most  varied  and  in- 
forming of  any  -worK  of  tHe  Kind  extant.  TKe  booK  is  a 
cyclopedia  in  a  nutsh.*!!."  —Lltermrj  Guide.  London,  Bag. 

1'ri'i.  ('  S.  I.ai>ant.  one  of  the  leading  educators  of  France, 
and  a  member  of  the  faculty  of  the  College  of  France,  says: 

"Admiration  is  too  feeble  a  word  to  express  my  opinion  of 
•  A    New   Catechism.'     It  is  a  marvelous  manual  of  rationalistic 
philosophy  and  scientific  morality.    To  disseminate  this  book  is  to 
aid  the  cause  of  European  democracy — the  emancipation  of  the 
people.    We  congratulate  Frenchmen  for  the  opportunity  of  read- 
ing in  their  own  language  so  beautiful  and  beneficent  a  book." 
M.  Vandervelde,  member  of  the  Parliament  of  Belgium,  says: 
"I  know  of  no  other  work  of  its  kind  which  is  as  lucid,  as 
loyal  to  truth,  and  as  attractive  to  the  daily  toiler,  as  it  is  to  the 
philosopher." — In    Introduction   to   French  Edition. 
Mr    Gee    \Y.  Foote,  of  England,  in  The  Freethinker: 
"Mr.   MaiiKasarian's  well-known  'Catechism'  promises  to  have 
a  great  sale  in  France  and  Belgium.    The  English  edition  ought 
to  be  widely  circulated  in  this  country.     It  is  written  with  power, 
knowledge,  and  dexterity.     Placed  in  the  hands  of  young  people, 
in  particular,  it  should  do  a  world  of  good  for  Free-thought." 

WHAT    THE    EUROPEAN    PAPERS    SAY    OF 
"A    NEW    CATECHISM" 

"Grapples  with  the  problems  that  underlie  all  the  creeds  and 
all  the  systems  of  science  and  philosophy." — Glasgow  Herald. 

"The  author  shows  good  judgment  in  devising  questions  and 
ureat  fertility  of  resource  in  answering  them.  The  book  is  well 
worth  a  perusal." — Educational  News,  London. 

"Mr  Man^asarian  seems  to  us  to  have  hit  upon  a  happy 
union  of  the  brevity  which  is  the  soul  of  wit  with  the  amplitude 
which  conduces  to  enlightenment.  .  .  .  It  is  acute,  stimulat- 
ing and  suggestive.  ...  It  is  eminently  readable,  and  we 
trust  it  will  have  the  extensive  sale  which  its  intrinsic  merit 
deserves." — Literary  Guide,  London. 


CHRISTIAN    SCIENCE 

A  Comedy  in  Four  Acts 

The  book  is  meant  for  those  in  whom  the- spirit  of  inquiry  is 
not  hopelessly 'stifled.  People  who  enjoy  doing  their  thinking, 
will  relish  reading  this  comedy.  The  motto  of  the  book  is :  "The 
light  is  known  to  have  failed  against  folly  sometimes,  the  laugh 
never."  80  pages.  Cloth  250,  paper  roc. 

The  above  should  be  read  in  connection  with  the  author's 
pamphlet  lecture  on  Why  Mrs.  Eddy's  Teachings  Appeal  to 
Women,  or  Christian  Science  Analyzed.  Price,  loc. 


A  FEW  OF  THE  PRINTED  LECTURES 
Of  M.  M.  Mangasarian 

'HOW  THE  BIBLE  WAS  INVENTED." 

'MORALITY  WITHOUT  GOD." 

'SUNDAY  SERMONS  AND  SUNDAY  SPORTS." 

'ORTHODOX  ATTACKS"  (Mr.  Mangasarian's  answer  to  The 

Outlook's  attack  on  "A  New  Catechism"). 
•PRAYER." 
'THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH  IN  AMERICA"   (Being  a  reply 

to  the  Archbishop  of  Chicago). 
'CHRISTIAN  SCIENCE  ANALYZED  AND  ANSWERED," 

2nd  Edition. 

'CHRISTIAN  SCIENCE— A  COMEDY." 
i(BRYAN  ON  RELIGION." 

"WHAT  WAS  THE  RELIGION  OF  SHAKESPEARE?" 
"SHAKESPEARE,  THE  RATIONALIST." 

IDC  per  copy.     Orchestra  Hall  Building,  Chicago. 


The  Independent  Religious  Society 

Lectures  are  delivered  every  Sunday  morning  at  n  by  M.  M. 
Mangasarian,  in  Orchestra  Hall,  Michigan  Avenue  and  Adams 
Street. 

The  aim,  spirit,  and  fellowship,  of  the  Society,  are  clearly  ex- 
pressed in  the  following  selection  from  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson : 

"The  new  church  will  be  founded  on  moral  science.  Poets, 
artists,  musicians,  philosophers,  will  be  its  prophet  teachers.  The 
noblest  literature  of  the  world  will  be  its  bible.  Love  and  labor, 
its  holy  sacraments^and  instead  of  worshipping  one  saviour,  it 
will  gladly  build  an  altar  in  the  heart  for  every  one  who  has  suf- 
fered for  humanity." 


University  of  California 
SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


;  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FAOUTY 

"A "6"66""623  040   9 


